UpdatingtheStationary VectorofaMarkovChain. Amy Langville Carl Meyer

Similar documents
Updating PageRank. Amy Langville Carl Meyer

Updating Markov Chains Carl Meyer Amy Langville

ECEN 689 Special Topics in Data Science for Communications Networks

Link Analysis. Leonid E. Zhukov

CONVERGENCE ANALYSIS OF A PAGERANK UPDATING ALGORITHM BY LANGVILLE AND MEYER

Mathematical Properties & Analysis of Google s PageRank

Analysis of Google s PageRank

Introduction to Search Engine Technology Introduction to Link Structure Analysis. Ronny Lempel Yahoo Labs, Haifa

for an m-state homogeneous irreducible Markov chain with transition probability matrix

Lab 8: Measuring Graph Centrality - PageRank. Monday, November 5 CompSci 531, Fall 2018

Calculating Web Page Authority Using the PageRank Algorithm

Link Analysis Ranking

How works. or How linear algebra powers the search engine. M. Ram Murty, FRSC Queen s Research Chair Queen s University

Link Analysis. Stony Brook University CSE545, Fall 2016

Computing PageRank using Power Extrapolation

Monte Carlo methods in PageRank computation: When one iteration is sufficient

A Fast Two-Stage Algorithm for Computing PageRank

Analysis and Computation of Google s PageRank

Uncertainty and Randomization

Online Social Networks and Media. Link Analysis and Web Search

Google PageRank. Francesco Ricci Faculty of Computer Science Free University of Bozen-Bolzano

CS246: Mining Massive Datasets Jure Leskovec, Stanford University

1998: enter Link Analysis

A Two-Stage Algorithm for Computing PageRank and Multistage Generalizations

A Note on Google s PageRank

DATA MINING LECTURE 13. Link Analysis Ranking PageRank -- Random walks HITS

IR: Information Retrieval

PageRank. Ryan Tibshirani /36-662: Data Mining. January Optional reading: ESL 14.10

Department of Applied Mathematics. University of Twente. Faculty of EEMCS. Memorandum No. 1712

Link Mining PageRank. From Stanford C246

Google Page Rank Project Linear Algebra Summer 2012

Markov Chains and Web Ranking: a Multilevel Adaptive Aggregation Method

Online Social Networks and Media. Link Analysis and Web Search

Pseudocode for calculating Eigenfactor TM Score and Article Influence TM Score using data from Thomson-Reuters Journal Citations Reports

The Second Eigenvalue of the Google Matrix

Krylov Subspace Methods to Calculate PageRank

Data Mining and Matrices

CPSC 540: Machine Learning

CS 277: Data Mining. Mining Web Link Structure. CS 277: Data Mining Lectures Analyzing Web Link Structure Padhraic Smyth, UC Irvine

Link Analysis. Reference: Introduction to Information Retrieval by C. Manning, P. Raghavan, H. Schutze

CPSC 540: Machine Learning

How does Google rank webpages?

eigenvalues, markov matrices, and the power method

CS224W: Social and Information Network Analysis Jure Leskovec, Stanford University

Approximate Inference

0.1 Naive formulation of PageRank

CS 188: Artificial Intelligence Spring Announcements

Page rank computation HPC course project a.y

Lecture 12: Link Analysis for Web Retrieval

Link Analysis Information Retrieval and Data Mining. Prof. Matteo Matteucci

Introduction to Data Mining

Applications. Nonnegative Matrices: Ranking

Hub, Authority and Relevance Scores in Multi-Relational Data for Query Search

Markov Chains and Spectral Clustering

Lecture 7 Mathematics behind Internet Search

Today. Next lecture. (Ch 14) Markov chains and hidden Markov models

IS4200/CS6200 Informa0on Retrieval. PageRank Con+nued. with slides from Hinrich Schütze and Chris6na Lioma

Complex Social System, Elections. Introduction to Network Analysis 1

Robert Collins CSE586, PSU. Markov-Chain Monte Carlo

Rank and Rating Aggregation. Amy Langville Mathematics Department College of Charleston

Coding the Matrix! Divya Padmanabhan. Intelligent Systems Lab, Dept. of CSA, Indian Institute of Science, Bangalore. June 28, 2013

CS6220: DATA MINING TECHNIQUES

Data and Algorithms of the Web

Graph Models The PageRank Algorithm

Hidden Markov Models. Hal Daumé III. Computer Science University of Maryland CS 421: Introduction to Artificial Intelligence 19 Apr 2012

Random Surfing on Multipartite Graphs

CS 188: Artificial Intelligence Fall Recap: Inference Example

Announcements. CS 188: Artificial Intelligence Fall VPI Example. VPI Properties. Reasoning over Time. Markov Models. Lecture 19: HMMs 11/4/2008

PageRank algorithm Hubs and Authorities. Data mining. Web Data Mining PageRank, Hubs and Authorities. University of Szeged.

Web Ranking. Classification (manual, automatic) Link Analysis (today s lesson)

CS6220: DATA MINING TECHNIQUES

MultiRank and HAR for Ranking Multi-relational Data, Transition Probability Tensors, and Multi-Stochastic Tensors

CS 188: Artificial Intelligence Spring 2009

Slide source: Mining of Massive Datasets Jure Leskovec, Anand Rajaraman, Jeff Ullman Stanford University.

MATH36001 Perron Frobenius Theory 2015

Data Mining Recitation Notes Week 3

Computational Economics and Finance

1 Searching the World Wide Web

Extrapolation Methods for Accelerating PageRank Computations

MULTILEVEL ADAPTIVE AGGREGATION FOR MARKOV CHAINS, WITH APPLICATION TO WEB RANKING

Models and Algorithms for Complex Networks. Link Analysis Ranking

Numerical Methods I: Eigenvalues and eigenvectors

Hidden Markov Models. Vibhav Gogate The University of Texas at Dallas

Lecture 15: MCMC Sanjeev Arora Elad Hazan. COS 402 Machine Learning and Artificial Intelligence Fall 2016

Google and Biosequence searches with Markov Chains

The Theory behind PageRank

Distributed Randomized Algorithms for the PageRank Computation Hideaki Ishii, Member, IEEE, and Roberto Tempo, Fellow, IEEE

arxiv:cond-mat/ v1 3 Sep 2004

CSEP 573: Artificial Intelligence

As it is not necessarily possible to satisfy this equation, we just ask for a solution to the more general equation

Markov Chains & PageRank

Outline. CSE 573: Artificial Intelligence Autumn Agent. Partial Observability. Markov Decision Process (MDP) 10/31/2012

LINK ANALYSIS. Dr. Gjergji Kasneci Introduction to Information Retrieval WS

Markov Models. CS 188: Artificial Intelligence Fall Example. Mini-Forward Algorithm. Stationary Distributions.

Web Structure Mining Nodes, Links and Influence

Announcements. CS 188: Artificial Intelligence Fall Markov Models. Example: Markov Chain. Mini-Forward Algorithm. Example

Markov Chains for Biosequences and Google searches

SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIALS TO THE PAPER: ON THE LIMITING BEHAVIOR OF PARAMETER-DEPENDENT NETWORK CENTRALITY MEASURES

Communities, Spectral Clustering, and Random Walks

ISE/OR 760 Applied Stochastic Modeling

Transcription:

UpdatingtheStationary VectorofaMarkovChain Amy Langville Carl Meyer Department of Mathematics North Carolina State University Raleigh, NC NSMC 9/4/2003

Outline Updating and Pagerank Aggregation Partitioning Iterative Aggregation Algorithm Experiments

The Updating Problem Given: Original chain s P andπ T and new chain s P Find: new chain s π T

P PageRank Application Google uses hyperlink structure of Web + fudge factor matrix to form irreducible, aperiodic Markov chain π i π T long-run proportion of time a random surfer spends on webpage i gives ranking of relative importance of webpages How Google Usesπ T To rank importance of thousands of pages containing a query phrase and list only the most important of those relevant pages to users.

Need for Updating PageRank vectorπ T Fact: Currently π T for immense Web Markov chain is computed monthly. Fact: Fact: Web changes much more frequently. Computing π T takes days. (hourly on news sites) (power method used) Need: Update π T more frequently with less work.

Use iterative aggregation to find π T faster, with less work, than full recomputation. Computing π T A Big Problem Solve π T = π T P π T (I P) = 0 (stationary distribution vector) (too big for direct solves) Start with π T 0 = e/n and iterate πt j+1 = πt j P (power method) Google s solution to updating problem Full recomputation run power method from scratch Start with π T 0 = e/n and iterate πt j+1 = πt P j Don t use old PageRank vector to find new PageRank faster. Our goal

Idea behind Aggregation Best for NCD systems (Simon and Ando (1960s), Courtois (1970s)) C 1 C 2 C 3 C 1 C 2 P = Π Τ Π τ C 3 C 1 C 2 C 3 A = C 1 C 2 C 3 a i j Τ = Π P ij e ξ Τ = ξ 1 ξ 2 ξ 3 Π Τ ~ ξ 1 Π Τ ξ 2 Π Τ ξ 3 Π Τ Pro Con exploits structure to reduce work produces an approximation, quality is dependent on degree of coupling

Iterative Aggregation Problem: repeated aggregation leads to fixed point. Solution: Do a power step to move off fixed point. Do this iteratively. Approximations improve and approach exact solution. Success with NCD systems, not in general. Input: approximation to Π get censored distributions Π T Π T Π T get coupling constants Output: get approximate global stationary distribution Output: move off fixed point with power step T ξ i T = ξ ξ ξ Π Π T Π T Π T 1 2 3

How to Partition for Updating Problem? Intuition There are some bad states (G) and some good states (G). Give more attention to bad states. Each state in G forms a partitioning level. Lump good states into 1 superstate. Aggregation Matrix A = G 1 G 2. G G 1 G 2... G ( G +1) ( G +1)

Definitions for Good and Bad 1. Good = states most likely to have π i change Bad = states least likely to have π i change 2. Good = states with smallest π i after k transient steps Bad = states nearby, with largest π i after k transient steps 3. Good = smallest π i from old PageRank vector Bad = largest π i from old PageRank vector 4. Good = fast converging states Bad = slow converging states

Determining Fast and Slow Consider power method and its rate of convergence π T k+1 = π T k P = π T k eπ T + λ k 2π T k x 2 y T 2 + λ k 3π T k x 3 y T 3 +... + λ k nπ T k x n y T n Asymptotic rate of convergence is rate at which λ k 2 0 Consider convergence of elements Some states converge to stationary value faster than λ 2 rate, due to LH e vector y T 2. Partitioning Rule Put states with largest y T 2 i values in bad group G, where Practicality y T 2 they receive more individual attention in aggregation method. expensive, but for PageRank problem, Kamvar et al. show states with large π i are slow-converging. inexpensive, use old π T to determine G. (adaptively approximate y T 2 )

Power law for PageRank Scale-free Model of Web network creates power laws (Kamvar, Barabasi, Raghavan)

Experiments Test Networks From Crawl Of Web (Supplied by Ronny Lempel) Censorship 562 nodes 736 links (Sites concerning censorship on the net ) Movies 451 nodes 713 links MathWorks 517 nodes 13,531 links Abortion 1,693 nodes 4,325 links Genetics 2,952 nodes 6,485 links (Sites concerning movies ) (Supplied by Cleve Moler) (Sites concerning abortion ) (Sites concerning genetics )

Parameters Number Of Nodes (States) Added 3 Number Of Nodes (States) Removed 5 Number Of Links Added (Different values have little effect on results) 10 Number Of Links Removed 20 Stopping Criterion 1-norm of residual < 10 10

The Partition Intuition to find slow converging states, but expen- Prefer to use y T 2 sive. + Slow converging components tend to be high PageRank pages The G Set New states go into G States corresponding to large entries in φ T = (φ 1, φ 2,..., φ m ) G States corresponding to small entries G

Censorship Power Method Iterations Time 38 1.40 Iterative Aggregation G Iterations Time 5 38 1.68 10 38 1.66 15 38 1.56 20 20 1.06 25 20 1.05 50 10.69 100 8.55 nodes = 562 links = 736 300 6.65 400 5.70

Censorship Power Method Iterative Aggregation Iterations Time 38 1.40 nodes = 562 links = 736 G Iterations Time 5 38 1.68 10 38 1.66 15 38 1.56 20 20 1.06 25 20 1.05 50 10.69 100 8.55 200 6.53 300 6.65 400 5.70

Movies Power Method Iterations Time 17.40 Iterative Aggregation G Iterations Time 5 12.39 10 12.37 15 11.36 20 11.35 nodes = 451 links = 713 100 9.33 200 8.35 300 7.39 400 6.47

Movies Power Method Iterative Aggregation Iterations Time 17.40 nodes = 451 links = 713 G Iterations Time 5 12.39 10 12.37 15 11.36 20 11.35 25 11.31 50 9.31 100 9.33 200 8.35 300 7.39 400 6.47

MathWorks Power Method Iterations Time 54 1.25 Iterative Aggregation G Iterations Time 5 53 1.18 10 52 1.29 15 52 1.23 20 42 1.05 25 20 1.13 nodes = 517 links = 13, 531 300 11.83 400 10 1.01

MathWorks Power Method Iterative Aggregation Iterations Time 54 1.25 nodes = 517 links = 13, 531 G Iterations Time 5 53 1.18 10 52 1.29 15 52 1.23 20 42 1.05 25 20 1.13 50 18.70 100 16.70 200 13.70 300 11.83 400 10 1.01

Abortion Power Method Iterations Time 106 37.08 Iterative Aggregation G Iterations Time 5 109 38.56 10 105 36.02 15 107 38.05 20 107 38.45 25 97 34.81 50 53 18.80 nodes = 1, 693 links = 4, 325 250 12 5.62 500 6 5.21 750 5 10.22 1000 5 14.61

Abortion Power Method Iterative Aggregation Iterations Time 106 37.08 nodes = 1, 693 links = 4, 325 G Iterations Time 5 109 38.56 10 105 36.02 15 107 38.05 20 107 38.45 25 97 34.81 50 53 18.80 100 13 5.18 250 12 5.62 500 6 5.21 750 5 10.22 1000 5 14.61

Genetics Power Method Iterations Time 92 91.78 Iterative Aggregation G Iterations Time 5 91 88.22 10 92 92.12 20 71 72.53 50 25 25.42 100 19 20.72 250 13 14.97 nodes = 2, 952 links = 6, 485 1000 5 17.76 1500 5 31.84

Genetics Power Method Iterative Aggregation Iterations Time 92 91.78 nodes = 2, 952 links = 6, 485 G Iterations Time 5 91 88.22 10 92 92.12 20 71 72.53 50 25 25.42 100 19 20.72 250 13 14.97 500 7 11.14 1000 5 17.76 1500 5 31.84

Conclusions First updating algorithm to handle both element and state updates. Algorithm is very sensitive to partition. For PageRank problem, partition can be determined cheaply from old PageRanks. For general Markov updating, use y T 2 to determine partition. When too expensive, approximate adaptively with Aitken s δ 2 or difference of successive iterates. Improvements Practical Optimize G-set Accelerate Smoothing Theoretical Relationship between partitioning by y T 2 and λ 2(S 2 ) not well-understood. Predict algorithm and partitioning by old π T will work very well on other scale-free networks.